Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-11-13

peace as it purported to be on March 81
1887, but did not in fact come into tn:
possession of said officer until April
1887, more than ten days after the rendi-
ton OF the judgment, after hearing wbict
the court dismissed the appeal. Held
Not error. Appellant moved for Ger
t8rsri to bring up more perfect record
from the Justices court, that Is, e re.
cord showing when said appeal
bond vas fled. This motion was over
ruled. Held: Mt error. 1t WAS fact
placed by the evidence beyond coDtro-
yersy, that the bond had not been depoEi
ted with the justice in time, and the lus-
tees record could not truthfully show to
the contrary. Affirmed. Wilson, J.
Neigh Owen VS.. the State; appeal from
Navarro county. Defendant was con-
victed IN the court below for obstructing
public road. The evidence showed that
the road in question was not located on
the line designated by the commissioners
court. TIE route designated by that
court did rot pass over defendants land
but slong its boundary line. In locating
the road it was placed upon defendants
land, which was then uninclosed prairies.
Defendants attorneys after being inform
ed Of these facts advised him that ne
had right to enclose his land and he
acted upon this advice. Held: The con-
viction is wreng. First, because the road
located ever defendants land was placed
there without authority OF law and was
that 1t was public road, the evidence
a., oh, no
lieving he hsd legal right to do SO, and
therefore did not willingly obstruct 1t.
Reversed and remsnded. Wilson, J.
Glen Wells vs.. the State; appeal froE
RockWall. Appellant was convicted in
County court in R9ckwall county, ca the
Stb DAY OF March, 1887, for violation OF
"the local option l.w," supposed to have
been adopted at an election held in that
county on the 9Th day Of January, 1887.
Ga the 18Th dag of April this court in the
case Of experte sublette declared the LEGAL
option law IS adopted in said county ab-
soIutelY yoiG for failure of compliance
IN it's adoption with the mandatory pro-
visions Of The loCal-Option statutes. %
Ct. APP 3G9.1 l. is further made to ap-
pear in tue transcript of the record that
the citizens Of said county at an election
Geld June 4, 1887, to determine the q1es
ton anew, defeated local option in said
county. Il is we'll settled rule that the
repeal OF the Iocal-option law by the pre-
scribed mode pending sn appeal from e
conviction for Its violation while in force
annuls the conviction. The judgment
is therefore reversed and the prosecution
dismissed. White, 2 J.
Glenn Wells vs. the Safe; appeal from
R3ckWaI county. This is q companion
case to the case Of Wells
VS.. State above reported.
rhe facts in this case
are same as in that, and the principles
governing that case gre decisive Of this.
r ,versed and dismissed. White, P, J.
J. T. Smith VS.. the State; appeal from
Marion countG. This appeal is from 8
conviction for keeping disorderly house.
The indictme at alleges the offense to have
been committed on or about the 10Th day
of December, 1880, and was returned into
court by the grand jury and fled on the
lst day of January, 1886. All misde-
meanors under our statute are permitted
to be presented by information or indic5-
ment within two years after the commits
sion OF the CfeDse and not after
ward. C. c. P, art. 200 Because the
prosecution was barred by the statute OF
Limitation when the indictment was
presented the judgment is reversed and
the prosecution dismissed. White, P,J.
81. Louis, Arkansas and Texas Railway
Company vs.. James s. Sharp; appeal
from Bowie county. Appellee recovered
judgment against appellant for $3.50
damages for alleged personal injuries.
The testimony showed that appellee was
walking along appellants track eouth-
ward from TeXarksna. He saw 8 train
coming towards him about 800 yards
away, and stepped off the track on TO the
right of way about twelve or fourteen
feet from the track. When within about
twenty-five feet ofhim the engine began
to squirt out hot water horizontally, aDd
es it passed him stream of hot water
and steam struck him and caused the in
iaries complained Of. The engineer
testified that in running an engine i6 WAS
necessary at certain times 20 use the liz
jector Of the engine, the use of which
would Cause stream of hot wafer and
steam 10 be thrown from the engine of
to one side of the track, distance OF
about fifteen feet; thai on the occasion in
question it was necessary TO use the in
j=ctor and that he used it in the discharge
of his duty Is engineer, and without any
intention Of i1juring appellee and without
seeing or knowing that appellee was in
position to be Injured thereby. Held:
The judgment is not supported by the
evidence. The evidence fairly shows
cOntrlbutory negligence on the
palt Of appellee. He saw
the train coming, sew that
IL was ejactIDg water,
and bad ample time to got out of danger.
The judgment is therefore reversed and
the cause remanded. Wilson, j.
J. 8. Lewis ct al. vs.. John 2. Richard
son; appeal from Hopkins county. APP
pellee recovered in Justices court the
following judgment: The court is of the
opinion that the law and facts are for the
plsintif; it is therefore ordered, adjudged,
and considered by the court that plaintiff
do have and recover from J. B. Lewis, II.
Slasy, Alex Yesner, T. s. Rogers and
John S Coffsy the sum of 500, etc. The
appeal bond describes the judgment as
against j. B. Lewis as principal,
and the other parties naming
them as sureties. In the County court
motion was made to dismiss the appeal,
because the bond misdescribed the iude-
ment. The court sustained the molten
and dismissed the appeal. Held: Error,
Il was not such misdes cription as rev.
ders it st all doubtful IS to What juGg-
ment Was referred to by the bond. The